Objections To Changes In Zoning Heard

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32214, 5 February 1970, Page 12

Objections To Changes In Zoning Heard

Objections to the residential zoning of properties in Colombo Street, Sydenham, and in Ferry Road, were heard by a sub-committee of the Christchurch City Council yesterday.

The sub-committee, hearing objections to the council’s district scheme, comprised Cr G. D. Griffiths (chairman) and Cr H. L. Garrett. Most of the objections were opposed by the Christchurch Regional Planning Authority. Mr R. G. McElrea appeared for Hutchinson Motors, Ltd, and for four other objectors, Messrs R. Clemence, M. Norton, D. R. Clyne and J. Pounsford, all seeking commercial zoning for properties in the block fronting Colombo Huxley and Walton streets. Option On Block The general manager of Hutchinson Motors, Ltd (Mr 10. A. Hutchinson), said that I his company had an option |to purchase the entire block. The company proposed to demolish the old houses, and redevelop the site as a south Christchurch branch of its main business.

The Town and Country Planning Appeal Board had given a clear indication that, no matter what the zoning, it would favourably consider a specified departure to enable the company to carry out its ■ purpose. I Regard should alsd be had |to the fact that the council was planning to establish a (works yard over the entire block immediately to the (south and fronting the land |in question. I John Loxley Patterson (Mr C. F. Hart) objected to the (proposed council yard, and to the underlying residential ‘zoning of his property at 287 and 289 Colombo Street. The properties should be zoned commercial because Ihe adjoining properties to the north comprised a fire station, a public library and a public park, Mr Patterson said. “Grave Injustice” It would be a grave injustice to impose an underlying residential zone which would never be used, as the only i purpose of such a zoning ' would be, should the opposi- • tion to the council yard be ■ unsuccessful, to. depreciate the I value of the property for pur- ■ ( poses of assessing compensation if the land was taken II over by the council.

! Mr G. Alexander appeared (in objection for Sydneham -Park Car Sales, seeking reItention of commercial zoning, and said the property of his

client was bounded by other! commercial properties. Mr J. C. Kearns, of Kearns Motors, Ltd, and Mr M. C. Hornsby (Mr P. G. S. Penlington) also sought retention of the present commercial zoning of their properties. Mr Kearns said that the proposed zoning change would diminish the value of his property at 265 Colombo Street, and that his secondhand car business caused virtually no traffic hazard. The part of Sydenham in question was not a true residential area. Mr Hornsby’s evidence Concerned a property at 271 to 275 Colombo Street. The property was now let to persons who continued to conduct a car sales business on it, Mr Hornsby having originally run his own car sales business there, the committee was told. The proposed zoning change would reduce the value of the property, and it was submitted the area was a recognised one for second-( hand car sales businesses. ' Council View The report of the council's technical officer (Mr W. T. Williams) said that Colombo Street represented one of the most serious examples ih

Christchurch of ribbon commercial development straddling a primary traffic street. Such developments were inconvenient for the public to use, and there was a danger to pedestrians who had to cross and recross the path of moving vehicles. The traffic efficiency of the street was reduced, it was not possible to provide offstreet parking to serve a complete development, and such development was inclined to be wasteful of land. The objective of the south Colombo Street commercial zoning was to create three separate areas wherein all future commercial development would take place: the main Sydenham shopping centre, the area south of Huxley Street, and the Tennyson Street centre. Ferry Road Mr J. H. M. Dawson appeared for six objectors seeking the retention of commercial zoning in Ferry Road, near Aidwins Road and Randolph Street. Mr Williams said that the north side of Ferry Road was to be widened between Aidwins Road and Randolph Street, and the widening, although not programmed, woud affect all the buildings in question. Ferry Road presented a particular planning problem in that over a two-mile stretch i east of Fitzgerald Avenue the

street facade comprised an unrelated mixture of uses, Mr Williams said. This extended ribbon development had many disadvantages and in planning for the next 20 years it was incumbent on the council to encourage some regrouping of uses. The scheme policy was to consolidate future development into the block between Manning Place and Hart Street, thus allowing access to off-street parking from the side streets.

The regional traffic engineer of the Regional Planning Authority (Mr M. Douglass), said the zoning sought by the objectors would be contrary to traffic efficiency. It was a well-established principle that suburban shopping centres should not straddle major roads. One of the most important suburban intersections in the region would be nearby. Objectors’ Views A director of the objecting company of K’s Cash and Carry, Ltd, Mr D. N. Knight, said the proposed rezoning would greatly devalue the property, which might become unsaleable except at an uneconomic figure. Mr N. M. Stewart, another objector, said he owned four properties, one of them in association with Mr P. R. Annan, another objector. The proposed residential zoning of the area was not appropriate, it was inconceivable that any residential development of the block would take place in the life of the present buildings, and the change would reduce the value of each section from about $10,600 to as little as $3OOO, he said. He did not believe anyone would build houses in the area.

Residential zoning would result- in the existing old buildings being retained indefinitely and the area becoming even more run down, instead of being redeveloped as it was under the present commercial zoning, Mr E. T. Lang said. With Mr G. E. Taylor and Mr A. W. Luxton he was the owner of the property at 407 Ferry Road which was occupied by a shop, a flat and by G. E. Taylor, Ltd, as a motorreconditioning factory, he said. A substantia! concreteblock factory building on the site was partly completed. The partners were bound to complete the factory, and proposed to erect shops along the Ferry Road frontage. The proposed zoning would leave a half-finished factory, and the value of the property would be greatly reduced.